Teacher unions, like the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA), were established to further the interests of teachers by increasing their pay and improving their working conditions. Fair enough. But when the ATA tries to undermine the ability of parents to choose the best educational options for their children, that crosses a line..And, indeed, the ATA crosses that line when it comes to private education..Alberta has had private educational options throughout its history. However, until the 1970s, the percentage of students in the province utilizing those private options was negligible. Public education constituted a virtual monopoly..However, in the late 1970s the situation began to change. North American culture was changing due to the Sexual Revolution, and this cultural change was reflected in new sex education programs as well as other parts of the curriculum. Some parents, especially conservative religious parents, began exploring private options that would provide education consistent with traditional morality..To make a long story short, a number of private schools were established in the late 1970s and early 1980s..This growth of private educational options posed a direct challenge to the public education establishment, which had enjoyed its comfortable monopoly for decades. The various elements of this establishment fought back against the rising private school tide, with the ATA taking a leading role..The ATA’s opposition to new educational endeavours varied with the degree to which schools were free to employ non-ATA teachers..In the late 1970s, the Holdeman Mennonites of Linden, Alberta opened the Kneehill Christian School despite being denied approval by the Department of Education. The ATA was very concerned about this perceived threat and adopted a resolution at its April 1977 convention urging the provincial government and school boards to inhibit the establishment of private schools..As the Saint John's Calgary Report — a precursor to Alberta Report — noted at the time, the “ATA, its closed shop monopoly on Alberta education clearly imperiled, demanded and brought about the prosecution of the 45 Kneehill parents.”.Indeed, according to one academic source, the ATA threatened to sue school boards if they didn’t prosecute the parents for truancy (i.e., because the children were not attending a government-approved school.) The local school board initiated legal action against the offending parents, and subsequently the Attorney General took over the prosecution..The president of the ATA was quoted by the Edmonton Journal at that time saying, “students are entitled to be taught by certified teachers.” In other words, students should be taught by ATA members..It seems clear that the ATA used what influence it had to encourage the prosecution of the Holdeman parents. The union could not stomach the existence of schools that used non-union teachers..Unfortunately for the ATA, the parents were acquitted. They argued that the Alberta Bill of Rights guaranteed freedom of religion and that teaching their children according to their religious beliefs was an aspect of religious freedom. This argument won the day..As a result of that decision, Premier Peter Lougheed’s Progressive Conservative government created a new category of private schools (called “Category 4” schools) that involved less restrictions and could employ uncertificated teachers, but was ineligible for government funding. Later, the term “Category 4” was changed to “registered.”.In 1989 the ATA passed the following resolution: “Be it resolved, that The Alberta Teachers' Association urge the Government of Alberta to abolish all registered private schools which are not classified as accredited in the Province of Alberta.” Private schools that could use uncertified teachers were the worst threat to the union’s privileged position..The ATA allegedly opposed such schools because they would harm their students. But, as American educational expert Myron Lieberman has written about teacher unions, “the appeal to pupil welfare is largely pro forma; the underlying issue is the welfare of teachers, not that of pupils.”.Of course, the ATA’s top concern about private schools is government funding. Private schools in Alberta began receiving a small amount of government funding in the late 1960s, during the final years of the Social Credit government. Then, during the first two terms of Lougheed’s government, the funding provided to private schools increased substantially..The ATA has always opposed government funding for private schools. During a government reevaluation of this issue in 1997, ATA president Bauni Mackay made the following statement to the Private Schools Funding Task Force: “Private-school supporters would like to fragment the public-education system, siphon off public funding and weaken well-established democratic-control mechanisms to realize a private vision of education. Under the guise of offering more choice, private-school supporters would like to foster the private good at public expense.”.The irony of this statement should not be lost on anyone. Mackay was claiming that private-school supporters “foster the private good at public expense” while she, herself, was advocating for the private good of the ATA at public expense..The central purpose of education is to prepare children for the future, not to provide well-paying jobs to people in the education industry. When the ATA promotes policies to restrict educational choices, it’s clear that the private good of the union is being prioritized at the expense of children. And the ATA has a history of promoting its own private good. That’s its purpose, after all..Albertans need to be aware that political campaigns promoted by the ATA — even during the election campaign — are designed to further the interests of the union, not the interests of families and children.
Teacher unions, like the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA), were established to further the interests of teachers by increasing their pay and improving their working conditions. Fair enough. But when the ATA tries to undermine the ability of parents to choose the best educational options for their children, that crosses a line..And, indeed, the ATA crosses that line when it comes to private education..Alberta has had private educational options throughout its history. However, until the 1970s, the percentage of students in the province utilizing those private options was negligible. Public education constituted a virtual monopoly..However, in the late 1970s the situation began to change. North American culture was changing due to the Sexual Revolution, and this cultural change was reflected in new sex education programs as well as other parts of the curriculum. Some parents, especially conservative religious parents, began exploring private options that would provide education consistent with traditional morality..To make a long story short, a number of private schools were established in the late 1970s and early 1980s..This growth of private educational options posed a direct challenge to the public education establishment, which had enjoyed its comfortable monopoly for decades. The various elements of this establishment fought back against the rising private school tide, with the ATA taking a leading role..The ATA’s opposition to new educational endeavours varied with the degree to which schools were free to employ non-ATA teachers..In the late 1970s, the Holdeman Mennonites of Linden, Alberta opened the Kneehill Christian School despite being denied approval by the Department of Education. The ATA was very concerned about this perceived threat and adopted a resolution at its April 1977 convention urging the provincial government and school boards to inhibit the establishment of private schools..As the Saint John's Calgary Report — a precursor to Alberta Report — noted at the time, the “ATA, its closed shop monopoly on Alberta education clearly imperiled, demanded and brought about the prosecution of the 45 Kneehill parents.”.Indeed, according to one academic source, the ATA threatened to sue school boards if they didn’t prosecute the parents for truancy (i.e., because the children were not attending a government-approved school.) The local school board initiated legal action against the offending parents, and subsequently the Attorney General took over the prosecution..The president of the ATA was quoted by the Edmonton Journal at that time saying, “students are entitled to be taught by certified teachers.” In other words, students should be taught by ATA members..It seems clear that the ATA used what influence it had to encourage the prosecution of the Holdeman parents. The union could not stomach the existence of schools that used non-union teachers..Unfortunately for the ATA, the parents were acquitted. They argued that the Alberta Bill of Rights guaranteed freedom of religion and that teaching their children according to their religious beliefs was an aspect of religious freedom. This argument won the day..As a result of that decision, Premier Peter Lougheed’s Progressive Conservative government created a new category of private schools (called “Category 4” schools) that involved less restrictions and could employ uncertificated teachers, but was ineligible for government funding. Later, the term “Category 4” was changed to “registered.”.In 1989 the ATA passed the following resolution: “Be it resolved, that The Alberta Teachers' Association urge the Government of Alberta to abolish all registered private schools which are not classified as accredited in the Province of Alberta.” Private schools that could use uncertified teachers were the worst threat to the union’s privileged position..The ATA allegedly opposed such schools because they would harm their students. But, as American educational expert Myron Lieberman has written about teacher unions, “the appeal to pupil welfare is largely pro forma; the underlying issue is the welfare of teachers, not that of pupils.”.Of course, the ATA’s top concern about private schools is government funding. Private schools in Alberta began receiving a small amount of government funding in the late 1960s, during the final years of the Social Credit government. Then, during the first two terms of Lougheed’s government, the funding provided to private schools increased substantially..The ATA has always opposed government funding for private schools. During a government reevaluation of this issue in 1997, ATA president Bauni Mackay made the following statement to the Private Schools Funding Task Force: “Private-school supporters would like to fragment the public-education system, siphon off public funding and weaken well-established democratic-control mechanisms to realize a private vision of education. Under the guise of offering more choice, private-school supporters would like to foster the private good at public expense.”.The irony of this statement should not be lost on anyone. Mackay was claiming that private-school supporters “foster the private good at public expense” while she, herself, was advocating for the private good of the ATA at public expense..The central purpose of education is to prepare children for the future, not to provide well-paying jobs to people in the education industry. When the ATA promotes policies to restrict educational choices, it’s clear that the private good of the union is being prioritized at the expense of children. And the ATA has a history of promoting its own private good. That’s its purpose, after all..Albertans need to be aware that political campaigns promoted by the ATA — even during the election campaign — are designed to further the interests of the union, not the interests of families and children.
